Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Conservative reaction to Bush

  1. #1
    Below is an excerpt from Andrew Sullivan&#39;s blog today. (Prominent Conservative, Editor of New Republic, [url]www.andrewsullivan.com[/url] <http://www.andrewsullivan.com> ):--slate.com


    A SUPERB SPEECH: It was the second best speech I have ever heard George W. Bush give - intelligently packaged, deftly structured, strong and yet also revealing of the president&#39;s obviously big heart. The speech writers deserve very high grades for pulling it off, to find a way to get the president to deal substantively with the domestic issues he is weak on and to soar once again on the imperatives of freedom in the Middle East. I will be very surprised if the president doesn&#39;t get a major boost from the effort, and if his minuscule lead in the race begins to widen. In this way, the whole convention was a very mixed message - but also a very effective one. They presented a moderate face, while proposing the most hard-right platform ever put forward by a GOP convention. They smeared and slimed Kerry - last night with disgusting attacks on his sincerity, patriotism and integrity. And yet they managed to seem positive after tonight. That&#39;s no easy feat. But they pulled it off. Some of this, I have to say, was Orwellian. When your convention pushes so many different messages, and is united with screaming chants of "U.S.A.", and built around what was becoming almost a cult of the Great Leader, skeptical conservatives have reason to raise an eyebrow or two.

    THE END OF CONSERVATISM: But conservatism as we have known it is now over. People like me who became conservatives because of the appeal of smaller government and more domestic freedom are now marginalized in a big-government party, bent on using the power of the state to direct people&#39;s lives, give them meaning and protect them from all dangers. Just remember all that Bush promised last night: an astonishingly expensive bid to spend much more money to help people in ways that conservatives once abjured. He pledged to provide record levels of education funding, colleges and healthcare centers in poor towns, more Pell grants, seven million more affordable homes, expensive new HSAs, and a phenomenally expensive bid to reform the social security system. I look forward to someone adding it all up, but it&#39;s easily in the trillions. And Bush&#39;s astonishing achievement is to make the case for all this new spending, at a time of chronic debt (created in large part by his profligate party), while pegging his opponent as the "tax-and-spend" candidate. The chutzpah is amazing. At this point, however, it isn&#39;t just chutzpah. It&#39;s deception. To propose all this knowing full well that we cannot even begin to afford it is irresponsible in the deepest degree. I&#39;ve said it before and I&#39;ll say it again: the only difference between Republicans and Democrats now is that the Bush Republicans believe in Big Insolvent Government and the Kerry Democrats believe in Big Solvent Government. By any measure, that makes Kerry - especially as he has endorsed the critical pay-as-you-go rule on domestic spending - easily the choice for fiscal conservatives. It was also jaw-dropping to hear this president speak about tax reform. Bush? He has done more to lard up the tax code with special breaks and new loopholes than any recent president. On this issue - on which I couldn&#39;t agree more - I have to say I don&#39;t believe him. Tax reform goes against the grain of everything this president has done so far. Why would he change now?

    FULL SPEED AHEAD: I agreed with almost everything in the foreign policy section of the speech, although the president&#39;s inability to face up to the obvious sobering lessons from Iraq is worrying. I get the feeling that empirical evidence does not count for him; that like all religious visionaries, he simply asserts that his own faith will vanquish reality. It won&#39;t. We heard nothing about Iran, North Korea or even anything concrete about Iraq. We heard no new bid to capitalize on the new mood in France or to win over new allies in the war on terror. We heard nothing about intelligence reform. And the contrasts with Kerry were all retrospective. There was no attempt to tell us where Kerry and Bush would differ in the future over the Middle East, just easy (and justified) barbs about the past. But Bush&#39;s big vision is, I believe, the right one. I&#39;m just unsure whether his profound unpopularity in every foreign country has made real movement more or less likely. I do know that the rank xenophobia at the convention did not help American foreign policy or American interests.

    BISMARCK + WILSON: The whole package was, I think, best summed up as a mixture of Bismarck and Wilson. Germany&#39;s Bismarck fused a profound social conservatism with a nascent welfare state. It was a political philosophy based on a strong alliance with military and corporate interests, and bound itself in a paternalist Protestant ethic. Bush Republicanism is not as authoritarian, but its impulses are similar - and the dynastic father-figure is a critical element in the picture. Bismarck&#39;s conservatism also relied, as Bush&#39;s does, on scapegoating a minority to shore up his Protestant support. Protecting the family from its alleged internal enemies is an almost perfect rallying call for a religiously inspired base. But unlike Bismarck, Bush&#39;s foreign policy is deeply liberal and internationalist: promoting a revolutionary doctrine of democratization abroad in the least hospitable of places. His faith in this respect, if not his ease with using military force, is reminiscent of Woodrow Wilson. Yes, this doesn&#39;t exactly add up to a coherent philosophy - but it&#39;s based on the president&#39;s feelings, not on any argument. This administration is not philosophically coherent. But as a political operation, that doesn&#39;t seem to matter.

    I CANNOT SUPPORT HIM IN NOVEMBER: I will add one thing more. And that is the personal sadness I feel that this president who praises freedom wishes to take it away from a whole group of Americans who might otherwise support many parts of his agenda. To see the second family tableau with one family member missing because of her sexual orientation pains me to the core. And the president made it clear that discriminating against gay people, keeping them from full civic dignity and equality, is now a core value for him and his party. The opposite is a core value for me. Some things you can trade away. Some things you can compromise on. Some things you can give any politician a pass on. But there are other values - of basic human dignity and equality - that cannot be sacrificed without losing your integrity itself. That&#39;s why, despite my deep admiration for some of what this president has done to defeat terror, and my affection for him as a human being, I cannot support his candidacy. Not only would I be abandoning the small government conservatism I hold dear, and the hope of freedom at home as well as abroad, I would be betraying the people I love. And that I won&#39;t do.

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    11,462
    Interesting read, Some good points by Mr. Sullivan.

    It&#39;s politics as usual when Dick Cheney&#39;s daughter is not allowed at the convention because she is lesbian. It&#39;s a sad commentary and it shows how despicable Dick Cheney is and how he would put politics ahead of his own family.

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,472
    [quote][i]Originally posted by YoungJetsFan[/i]@Sep 4 2004, 02:38 AM
    [b] Interesting read, Some good points by Mr. Sullivan.

    It&#39;s politics as usual when Dick Cheney&#39;s daughter is not allowed at the convention because she is lesbian. It&#39;s a sad commentary and it shows how despicable Dick Cheney is and how he would put politics ahead of his own family. [/b][/quote]
    The sad thing is that Cheney is no different than most national politicians, which is one thing I like about Bush. I actually believe he cares about his family, not something I believe about Cheney, Kerry, or Edwards. For them it is blind ambition that drives them.

  4. #4
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]The sad thing is that Cheney is no different than most national politicians, which is one thing I like about Bush. I actually believe he cares about his family, not something I believe about Cheney, Kerry, or Edwards. For them it is blind ambition that drives them.
    [/b][/quote]

    If he cared so much about his family he wouldn&#39;t allow his daughters to consume &#036;4500 worth of Vodka with their entourage, during the convention.

  5. #5
    flushingjet
    Guest
    Thats a light afternoon for Teddy Kennedy :lol: . But hey thats water under the bridge.

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]Thats a light afternoon for Teddy Kennedy . But hey thats water under the bridge. [/b][/quote]

    Is Ted Kennedy President?

    Did Ted Kennedy claim to have found Jesus who helped him overcome alcoholism?

    The claim in the thread was that Bush cares so deeply about his family.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Sep 6 2004, 10:09 PM
    [b] [quote][b]Thats a light afternoon for Teddy Kennedy . But hey thats water under the bridge. [/b][/quote]

    Is Ted Kennedy President?

    [/b][/quote]
    no...are the Bush twins?

  8. #8
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]no...are the Bush twins?
    [/b][/quote]

    That makes no sense. I was responding to Pipers assertion that Bush cares so deeply for his family. Hence his daughters and their behavoir, are relavent.

    (I&#39;ll give you some help, your rebuttle could simply be a picture of Kerry&#39;s daughter at the Cannes film festival.)

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,472
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Sep 6 2004, 09:46 PM
    [b] [quote][b]The sad thing is that Cheney is no different than most national politicians, which is one thing I like about Bush. I actually believe he cares about his family, not something I believe about Cheney, Kerry, or Edwards. For them it is blind ambition that drives them.
    [/b][/quote]

    If he cared so much about his family he wouldn&#39;t allow his daughters to consume &#036;4500 worth of Vodka with their entourage, during the convention. [/b][/quote]
    A. Your assuming that they drank most of the vodka, because it fit&#39;s your agenda

    B. A party celebrating a presidential nomination is a pretty big event in most families and would warrent a party. I doubt most &#39;caring&#39; parents would &#39;not allow&#39; their kids to join in festivities and probably would be personally checking the bar tab.

    Nice try. But this is crap and you know it.

  10. #10
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]A. Your assuming that they drank most of the vodka, because it fit&#39;s your agenda

    B. A party celebrating a presidential nomination is a pretty big event in most families and would warrent a party. I doubt most &#39;caring&#39; parents would &#39;not allow&#39; their kids to join in festivities and probably would be personally checking the bar tab.

    Nice try. But this is crap and you know it. [/b][/quote]

    Its not crap. Bush is the one who touts his triumph over alcoholism, yet allows his daughters to live the lifestyle he used to. How many times have the twins gotten into trouble for alcohol, yet they still never learn. If Bush cared so deeply about them he would interveen.

  11. #11
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Sep 7 2004, 10:01 AM
    [b] [quote][b]A. Your assuming that they drank most of the vodka, because it fit&#39;s your agenda

    B. A party celebrating a presidential nomination is a pretty big event in most families and would warrent a party. I doubt most &#39;caring&#39; parents would &#39;not allow&#39; their kids to join in festivities and probably would be personally checking the bar tab.

    Nice try. But this is crap and you know it. [/b][/quote]

    Its not crap. Bush is the one who touts his triumph over alcoholism, yet allows his daughters to live the lifestyle he used to. How many times have the twins gotten into trouble for alcohol, yet they still never learn. If Bush cared so deeply about them he would interveen. [/b][/quote]
    You&#39;re pathetic. Slamming Bush&#39;s daughters with no basis in reality. Your worse than Whoopie Goldberg slamming him based on his name.

    I guess you must now be coming to the realization that Kerry is screwed. Yesterdays waffle on Iraq will solidify him as the change with the winds empty glass that he is. Now he&#39;s against the war again. That should make you happy but its not going to inspire trust from the center which has seen him change positions on the issue allmost monthly.

    Good luck in November waffle boy.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us